is 5'7 and 130 pounds unhealthy?

Options
13

Replies

  • kwinterscheidt
    kwinterscheidt Posts: 45 Member
    Options
    I think it depends on how your body stores fat.
    i am also 5'7" and you can see all my ribs and spine at 130. i look a lot healthier around 145-150. i weigh 195 right now and it looks like i weight about 170ish because i carry my weight really well.
    i think if you have a lot of muscle like me then 130 might be a little low but you could be great at 130.
    maybe just see how you look and feel as you drop those pounds and make a determination about your goal weight when you get closer to is.
  • NatalieWinning
    NatalieWinning Posts: 999 Member
    Options
    I just hit the high "normal" category for BMI, which was always low for my body mass. In the past, younger, I was more muscular and always heavy, though still fit and thin. But, I'm older, and my body composition maybe different now.

    There are lots of free website tools for body fat %, BMI, estimate. I took a lot of those and put them all together to come up with a low goal for me (5'2" and 49 yrs old) of maybe 125 at my low end goal. So go look them up with google, and compare all the results with some common sense, so you can come up with a realistic goal. And listen to your own body, too.
  • heathersmilez
    heathersmilez Posts: 2,579 Member
    Options
    remember muscle weighs more than fat.

    Ugh!!!! A pound is a pound whether it is bricks or feathers. Muscle takes up less space like bricks compared to feathers but does NOT weigh less!

    And yes, 130 for 5’7 is a good goal but being curvy or not a small build may hold you back, you’ll see as you get healthy. I’m 5’8 and so a healthy BMI is 124-160 lbs so getting back to 132lbs where I was 2 years and 8 lbs ago is not unrealistic for me. I like the idea of 129 though if possible b/c that’s a BMI of 19.5, just under 20 and under 130lbs so it’s a fun number :happy:
  • mikebraziel
    mikebraziel Posts: 1
    Options
    my wife is 5'7 and she weighs 130 lbs exactly. she says she likes to be anywhere between 127 and 131. anything else and she doesn't feel very good.
  • 123456654321
    123456654321 Posts: 1,311 Member
    Options
    What makes you think it would be unhealthy?

    I don't think it is unhealthily thin, but 130 is the ideal weight for someone 5'5" with a small build, so it makes sense it's going to be on the thin side for someone 2 inches taller.

    ??? 5'7 at 130 is a bmi of 20.4. A healthy BMI is generally supposed to fall between 18.5–24.9. Not that I totally depend on BMI because it doesn't factor in your frame size and muscle mass, but still...I don't think 130 is too far on the thin side either way.
  • k_ewilliams
    k_ewilliams Posts: 43
    Options

    I've heard of people switching to more strength exercises after they lose weight, but I never thought about it, really. This is very true. When I was around 149-150 I was still extremely disappointed in my stomach and thighs. They never seemed to want to go away as much as I would like. I would love to wear a size six, but I don't even know if that's possible with my thighs and stomach. So - thank you very much! I will remember this. I will try to get to where I feel healthy and then focus on my shape. :)

    I'm in the same boat. I'm now 148ish, and I hatee my thighs and stomach. I am a size 8/10 now, but I am trying to get down to 135 and then just see what I am like there. Don't worry so much about whether its too low for you, as you lose weight, you'll be able to tell if you look too skinny or feel terrible. I definitely want to get down to 139 though.
    From what you are saying, you sound like you are of smaller build. So being 130 isn't unreasonable. A girl I work with is 5'9 and only 135, and she looks (and feels) really healthy.
  • suzycreamcheese
    suzycreamcheese Posts: 1,766 Member
    Options
    its not unhealthy, id say it was slap bang in the middle of a healthy weight. Not too skinny, not fat
  • ShapeUpSidney
    ShapeUpSidney Posts: 1,092 Member
    Options

    Ugh!!!! A pound is a pound whether it is bricks or feathers. Muscle takes up less space like bricks compared to feathers but does NOT weigh less!

    Thanks so much for that. I'm always annoyed when I see how common it is to make this mistake in the most rudimentary of physics concepts.
  • ladybg81
    ladybg81 Posts: 1,553 Member
    Options
    a rule of thumb for "ideal" weight is 100 lbs at 5' and add 5lbsper inch, so at 5'7" this would put you at 135 (100 +7*5) for large frame add 10% for smaller frame minus 10% so 121.5-148.5 depending on frame size.


    That would make me 150. That is where I started losing and hated myself. This might be a good rule for some, but I would personally never abide my this. You have to feel good about yourself.

    I'm 5'10 and weigh 134 (goal weight was 135) and I look amazing. You're 3 inches shorter than me and only wanting to weight 4 pounds less. I think you'll be fine.
  • NatalieWinning
    NatalieWinning Posts: 999 Member
    Options
    What makes you think it would be unhealthy?

    I don't think it is unhealthily thin, but 130 is the ideal weight for someone 5'5" with a small build, so it makes sense it's going to be on the thin side for someone 2 inches taller.

    ideal for 5'5" is 125 (100+5*5) regular frame, small frame at 5'5" wold be between 112.5 and 125.

    I was 115 once (I'm 5'2") and all my bones were sticking out, anorexic like. So go check body fat estimates and BMI as well, and go by how you look and feel. Not just a calculator that says you should be something. At my height I could be nearly down to 100lbs, but I would be in the hospital! 130 may be more my normal skinny in reality for me. Your reality needs more than a guess from others and what they weight.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    remember muscle weighs more than fat.

    Ugh!!!! A pound is a pound whether it is bricks or feathers. Muscle takes up less space like bricks compared to feathers but does NOT weigh less!

    Because muscle is more dense it does weigh more than fat. The person you quoted did not state that 1lb of muscle weighs more than 1 lb of fat, they stated, truthfully that muscle weighs more than fat. (keep volume as the constant, that is what makes it true) I have no idea why you are using weight as the constant as that would only make sense if you were comparing volumes.

    If you are comparing weights, keep volume constant, if you are comparing volume keep weight as the constant.

    Your argument then would be that carrots and butter have the same caloric content because 100 calories of butter = 100 calories of carrots, if so you miss the whole point of someone saying butter has more caloires than carrots.
  • bhb301
    bhb301 Posts: 338 Member
    Options
    Everybody is different. Im 5'7 shooting for 138.. 130 is too small for me
  • Melk967
    Melk967 Posts: 55 Member
    Options
    I am 5'7" and I used to be 125 throughout most of high school. I was 130 for a long time. That's my goal weight. Yes it is healthy :)
  • Angela_MA
    Angela_MA Posts: 260
    Options
    I am 5'7 and shooting for 135, so no I do not think it is unrealistic. What type of bone frame are you; meaning big, medium or small boned. I am medium boned and my doctor has stated 130-140 is a healthy weight.
  • NanoReefDiver
    NanoReefDiver Posts: 153
    Options
    I am 5'7" and currently 132. I have a small frame and definitely have my share of muscle. I would look healthier at very toned 122-125. I've been that weight before and it felt and looked fabulous.
  • robin52077
    robin52077 Posts: 4,383 Member
    Options

    I was 115 once (I'm 5'2") and all my bones were sticking out, anorexic like. So go check body fat estimates and BMI as well, and go by how you look and feel. Not just a calculator that says you should be something. At my height I could be nearly down to 100lbs, but I would be in the hospital! 130 may be more my normal skinny in reality for me. Your reality needs more than a guess from others and what they weight.

    This is a perfect example of "everyone is different".

    This person thought bones were sticking out at 115 and would be happy at 130.
    We are the SAME height, yet I joined here at 130 because I was absolutely disgusted with myself and am finally pretty happy at 107 (current profile pic).

    Just play it by ear, exercise, eat right, and decide when to switch to maintenance when you are happy with your current clothing size/measurements, regardless of what the scale says.
  • michalita
    michalita Posts: 27
    Options
    Everyone's different. I'm 5'6", and 130 is just about right if not a bit too much for me. I have a small frame, and for most of my adult life I was under 130. That's my present goal, and I'll re-evaluate if I think I need to be smaller.
  • 123456654321
    123456654321 Posts: 1,311 Member
    Options

    Ugh!!!! A pound is a pound whether it is bricks or feathers. Muscle takes up less space like bricks compared to feathers but does NOT weigh less!

    Thanks so much for that. I'm always annoyed when I see how common it is to make this mistake in the most rudimentary of physics concepts.

    Ugh!!!! .....I'm so annoyed with people's correcting this like they are debunking some huge myth. When talking about weight it makes sense to speak per volume. Muscle DOES weigh more then fat per volume.
  • Emalyn
    Emalyn Posts: 60
    Options
    Ay yi yi I want to quote tons of people!!

    Thanks soo much for all the tips. I get obsessed sometimes with what I "should weigh". Wow, there are a lot of people like me, I guess! 5'7 must be popular, hehe. I appreciate everyone's posts. I think I will keep my MFP goal the same for now, but play it by ear all the same. If I get to 140 and feel I could do more and don't feel completely healthy yet, then I will. :)

    To answer someone else's question (forgot the username!!): I have a pretty small build, but it could be on the border of medium, as well. In between the two. I have never been too athletic, although I love to be active, so I don't have much muscle. I would love to have muscle, because being 130 and as weak as a kitten doesn't sound too appealing to me.

    To answer someone ELSE'S question: I can't remember the last time I was 130, and how I felt. When I was 12 I lost about 50 pounds. It was the smallest I had been since I was about eight or nine, which is hard to believe when I tell people. I cannot remember being lower than 148 at my current height. I have been this height since I was about 14!

    I just get worried that it's an unrealistic hope because of my curves. I don't have a big bones or a strong build or frame or anything, but I wouldn't want to lose so much weight that my curves disappear too - not because I'm worried about how it would look, but because they're my natural curves, and it seems only right for them to stick around, lol!

    I will make sure to play it by ear. I get sooo into all those numbers and statistics that I drives me crazy sometimes. But I have to remember that I'm doing this to feel healthy, not look like a toothpick.

    Thanks all!!! :) I can't believe how many people posted!
  • fteale
    fteale Posts: 5,310 Member
    Options

    Ugh!!!! A pound is a pound whether it is bricks or feathers. Muscle takes up less space like bricks compared to feathers but does NOT weigh less!

    Thanks so much for that. I'm always annoyed when I see how common it is to make this mistake in the most rudimentary of physics concepts.

    Ugh!!!! .....I'm so annoyed with people's correcting this like they are debunking some huge myth. When talking about weight it makes sense to speak per volume. Muscle DOES weigh more then fat per volume.

    3 times more, apparently.

Categories